On May 26, 2010, Virginia Governor [[Bob McDonnell]] withdrew the state from the second round of Race to the Top funding. Virginia had finished 31st out of 41 states in the first round, but McDonnell said that Virginia should apply for the second round as the competition required the use of common education performance standards instead of Virginia's current standards. In fact, the use of common performance standards is not required.<ref>{{cite news|title=Virginia Withdraws from Obama's Race to the Top|work=Washington Post|author=Nick Anderson and Rosalind Helderman|date=March 27, 2010|page=B4}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|quote=Race to the Top does not endorse any particular consortium or set of standards. Criterion (B)(1) specifies characteristics of consortia and standards that earn States points under this criterion.|url=http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/faq.pdf|publisher=US Department of Education|title=Race to the Top Program Guidance and Frequently Asked Questions|date=May 27, 2010|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref> Although McDonnell supported the Race to the Top program during his campaign for governor,<ref>{{cite news|rul=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/06/mcdonnell_explains_decision_to.html

On May 26, 2010, Virginia Governor [[Bob McDonnell]] withdrew the state from the second round of Race to the Top funding. Virginia had finished 31st out of 41 states in the first round, but McDonnell said that Virginia should apply for the second round as the competition required the use of common education performance standards instead of Virginia's current standards. In fact, the use of common performance standards is not required.<ref>{{cite news|title=Virginia Withdraws from Obama's Race to the Top|work=Washington Post|author=Nick Anderson and Rosalind Helderman|date=March 27, 2010|page=B4}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|quote=Race to the Top does not endorse any particular consortium or set of standards. Criterion (B)(1) specifies characteristics of consortia and standards that earn States points under this criterion.|url=http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/faq.pdf|publisher=US Department of Education|title=Race to the Top Program Guidance and Frequently Asked Questions|date=May 27, 2010|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref> Although McDonnell supported the Race to the Top program during his campaign for governor,<ref>{{cite news|rul=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2010/06/mcdonnell_explains_decision_to.html

|title=McDonnell on MSNBC: Race to the Top too burdensome|first=Anita |last=Kumar |work=Washington Post|date=June 1, 2010}}</ref> he claimed on his June 1 appearance on MS-NBC that the Race to the Top rules precluded participating states from adopting more rigorous standards in addition to whatever multi-state standards they join.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/06/01/mcdonnell-makes-things-up/|title=McDonnell Falsely Claims That Race To The Top Would Force Virginia To Lower Its Academic Standards|date=June 1, 2010|first=Pat |last=Garofalo|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://virginiapolitics.mytimesdispatch.com/index.php/virginiapolitics/comments/mcdonnell_on_msnbc_race_to_the_top_would_bring_burdensome_federal_stan/#comment|title=McDonnell on MSNBC: Race to the Top would bring “burdensome” federal standards|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref> However, in some cases, "Race to the Top" regulations award the points even if states adopt standards more rigorous than the optional, common standards.<ref>{{cite web|quote=A State may

|title=McDonnell on MSNBC: Race to the Top too burdensome|first=Anita |last=Kumar |work=Washington Post|date=June 1, 2010}}</ref> he claimed on his June 1 appearance on MS-NBC that the Race to the Top rules precluded participating states from adopting more rigorous standards in addition to whatever multi-state standards they join.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/06/01/mcdonnell-makes-things-up/|title=McDonnell Falsely Claims That Race To The Top Would Force Virginia To Lower Its Academic Standards|date=June 1, 2010|first=Pat |last=Garofalo|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://virginiapolitics.mytimesdispatch.com/index.php/virginiapolitics/comments/mcdonnell_on_msnbc_race_to_the_top_would_bring_burdensome_federal_stan/#comment|title=McDonnell on MSNBC: Race to the Top would bring “burdensome” federal standards|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref> However, in some cases, "Race to the Top" regulations award the points even if states adopt standards more rigorous than the optional, common standards.<ref>{{cite web|quote=A State may

−

supplement the common standards with additional standards, provided that the additional standards do not exceed 15 percent of the State's total standards for that content area.|url=http://www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/announcements/2009-4/111809c.html|work=[[Federal Register]]|title=Overview Information: Race to the Top Fund|date=November 18, 2009|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref>

+

supplement the common standards with additional standards, provided that the additional standards do not exceed 15 percent of the State's total standards for that content area.|url=http://www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/announcements/2009-4/111809c.html|work=Federal Register|title=Overview Information: Race to the Top Fund|date=November 18, 2009|accessdate=2010-06-11}}</ref>

In addition to the 485 possible points from the criteria above, the prioritization of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) education was worth another fifteen points for a possible total of 500.[2]

The highest scores in the first round belonged to Delaware, with 454.6, and Tennessee with 444.2. The lowest score received was 135.8 for South Dakota in 41st place.[3]

Timetable

Phase 1 applications for funding were due on January 19, 2010. 40 states applied for funding, as did the District of Columbia. Phase 1 winners were announced on March 29, 2010. The deadline for submitting Phase 2 applications was June 1; phase 2 decisions were announced in September 2010.[2] The U.S. Department of Education awarded two groups of states grants to develop a new generation of tests to be aligned to the Common Core standards. The tests aim to assess students' knowledge of mathematics and English language arts from third grade through high school. The grant totaling approximately $330 million were awarded to the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) in the amounts of approximately $170 and $160 million respectively.[http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-secretary-education-duncan-announces-winners-competition-improve-student-asseEd.gov, "U.S. Secretary of Education Duncan Announces Winners of Competition to Improve Student Assessments
Two winning applications composed of 44 States and D.C. Win Grants to Fund Assessments Based on Common Core Standards
September 2, 2010.[</ref>

Effects

Many states took actions to make their applications more competitive. For instance, Illinois lifted a cap on the number of charter schools it allows; Massachusetts made it easier for students in low-performing schools to switch to charters, and West Virginia proposed a merit pay system that includes student achievement in its compensation calculations.[4]

Race to the Top also prompted 48 states to adopt common standards for K-12, which have come to be known as the Common Core State Standards(CCSS).[5] Adoption was accelerated by the August 1, 2010 deadline for adopting common standards, after which states would not receive points toward round two applications. In addition, the White House announced a $350 million federal grant funding the development of assessments aligned to the Common Core State Standards. States that adopted these standards stood the best chance of winning. This allowed the Department of Education to circumvent federal laws that prohibit the federal government in Washington from interfering in education at the state and local level. Education is traditionally and constitutionally the province of state and local government, but these incentive grants were very helpful in shoring up education budgets in cash-strapped states.[6][7][8]

Awards

States were eligible for different funding award buckets depending on their share of the federal population of children between the ages of 5-17. The buckets range from $20–75 million up to the highest phase 1 award range of $350–$700 million. Only the four largest states (California, Texas, Florida, and New York) were eligible for this highest bucket. The majority of first-round applicant states were not expected to receive funding.[9]

Fifteen states as well as the District of Columbia were named as Round 1 Finalists on Thursday, March 4, 2010: Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Tennessee.[10]

On March 29, 2010, Tennessee and Delaware were named as the only winners of the first round of the Race to the Top; Tennessee received $500 million and Delaware received $100 million. Announcing the winners, Duncan said, "both states have statewide buy-in for comprehensive plans to reform their schools. They have written new laws to support their policies. And they have demonstrated the courage, capacity, and commitment to turn their ideas into practices that can improve outcomes for students."[11] Along with naming the two first round winners, the Department of Education released the complete scoring of each application, with the intention of making the scoring process more transparent and helping states revise their applications to be more competitive for the second round of competition.

Evaluation of program

While many states have sought to comply with application guidelines, the Race to the Top competition has also encountered opposition from incumbents. Two major sources of opposition have been from teachers' unions and those opposed to what they see as interference from the federal government. In explaining why Texas would not be applying for Race to the Top funding, Governor Rick Perry stated, "we would be foolish and irresponsible to place our children’s future in the hands of unelected bureaucrats and special interest groups thousands of miles away in Washington."[12]

Critics further contend that the reforms being promoted are unproven or have been unsuccessful in the past. Former Assistant Secretary of Education Diane Ravitch, for example, commented that empirical evidence "shows clearly that choice, competition and accountability as education reform levers are not working."[13] Finally, the Economic Policy Institute released a report in April 2010 finding that "the selection of Delaware and Tennessee was subjective and arbitrary, more a matter of bias or chance than a result of these states’ superior compliance with reform policies."[14]

On May 26, 2010, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell withdrew the state from the second round of Race to the Top funding. Virginia had finished 31st out of 41 states in the first round, but McDonnell said that Virginia should apply for the second round as the competition required the use of common education performance standards instead of Virginia's current standards. In fact, the use of common performance standards is not required.[15][16] Although McDonnell supported the Race to the Top program during his campaign for governor,[17] he claimed on his June 1 appearance on MS-NBC that the Race to the Top rules precluded participating states from adopting more rigorous standards in addition to whatever multi-state standards they join.[18][19] However, in some cases, "Race to the Top" regulations award the points even if states adopt standards more rigorous than the optional, common standards.[20]